no idea, i remember when i was a teenager someone i worked with left her council house to get away from her abusive husband and the council said she'd made herself intentionally homeless, even now they try and make the abused party stay in the council home but at least the housing now do help with prosecuting the offender.

no idea, i remember when i was a teenager someone i worked with left her council house to get away from her abusive husband and the council said she'd made herself intentionally homeless, even now they try and make the abused party stay in the council home but at least the housing now do help with prosecuting the offender.

whereas those not claiming housing benefit get the crummy houses as they are the only ones they can afford.
No one should live in crummy housing but seriously, if your parents abandon you, you cannot support yourself you shouldnt be having a child.. and yes mistakes happen.. but too many .

Everybody's circumstances are different... In my case I didn't choose to be 'abandoned' or homeless, I don't think anybody chooses to be alone.

The council can't decide you are intentionally homeless if it wasn't reasonable for you to stay in the accommodation you left. This could be because:

you (or someone in your household) was experiencing violence or threats that were likely to be carried out
it was of a very poor standard compared with other housing in the area
you couldn't afford to live there unless you went without basic necessities such as food or heating
it was seriously affecting your health.

I get so frustrated in these debates about London and the housing situation....

There are a LOT of low paid jobs that need to be done in London. When people take these jobs, then their wages are low. People need to take these jobs as the work needs to be done. The wages for a lot of these jobs means that people cannot afford their rent (if they live in an area they can reasonably be expected to travel from)...so they need help. Paula and I have BOTH stated that 80% of housing benefit recipients work, so most of the people Twatface Cameron is talking about ARE EMPLOYED! To say to these people that they should move out of London if they can't afford to live there is counter productive. If everyone did that there would be tons of vacancies that no-one could afford to take as they would not be able to afford to live within travelling distance of the work...So there would be tons of companies in London going out of business...places would not be cleaned, there would be no nurses or carers, no-one to serve lunches to stock-brokers and politicians...I could go on...

Does that not mean anything to some people. It's NOT as straightforward as just saying "if you can't afford to live in London without state help then move". The infrastructure of our capital would collapse without low paid, menial (and other lower paid) professions. This work is important. Just because people aren't paid as much does not mean they do not work as hard, or that their work is not vital to the running of the country. If London was just full of "high-earners" it wouldn't run properly. I lived in SE London for 4 years and worked as an administrator in the city. I earned a decent wage and could JUST afford to run a one bedroom flat in a ****ty area. There was visible drug use, violence and murders every week. I could hear gun-shots when going to bed at night. If I lost my job and could only find something lower paid I would have needed help. It's all very well saying on a one person basis "well just move". But if we create a situation where everyone who cannot afford extortionate London rents is forced, not just out of the City, but far enough away to actually have cheaper rent and therefore commute miles and miles, probably not being able to afford that either...well it's just not going to work is it?

I think maybe unless you own a home with all the relevant insurances and current rates it is hard to understand costs of mortgages. I bought my first house for £130k which is not alot at all. My monthly repayments for the first 2 years was over 1k... So if I had to rent out due to being unable to sell or whatever reason my rent would need to cover my cost of mortgage. I dont get why people would expect people to rent out at a loss would they do that if the shoe was on the other foot.

People know childcare and housing costs are high.. so they have children, then bleat for the childcare and rents to be reduced. No thought that childcare providers need a living wage and home owners need to recover their outgoings.It shows a total naivety and immaturity..

yes it needs to change, cost of living is seriously out of kilter with wages... but not looking at the model as a whole is ridiculous and just chopping outgoings would have a bad impact too.

In my borough,DV victims are moved out quite quickly, and placed in temporary accomodation. It makes the process easier if there has been Police involvement at some stage,and can be proven. After a few weeks, as long as the Council property you left was your own tenancy, you have to give up that tenancy, and then you are classed as homeless and await a new property.

no idea, i remember when i was a teenager someone i worked with left her council house to get away from her abusive husband and the council said she'd made herself intentionally homeless, even now they try and make the abused party stay in the council home but at least the housing now do help with prosecuting the offender.

I remember me and my ex were considered intentionally homeless when an accident at home caused an explosion that left my ex disabled and covered in severe burns.

I kicked off a bit about that though and in the end they helped us (with private rented, but that was fine...we just wanted somewhere safe and clean for my ex to recuperate). This was about 6 years ago.

Thing is....especially with CHing, space is an issue. For years I had 3 dcs in a 2 bed house and worked full time and paid my own rent. The 2 older ones' left home when hitched, and now it is dd2 and myself and she is 13 and has her own room. If my older ones stayed with me, where do they sleep? And to get a bigger CH here in London is like winning the lottery.

Also, Housing Benefit claimants, 80% of them are in work, and wages too low to pay the rent. If an under 25 is renting privately,particularly here in London, unless they are on a Kings ransome they have no choice but to claim some HB. How is it fair for a working adult to have the rug pulled like that and forced onto the street.It is the most ridiculous not thought out policy he has come out with in ages
Idiot

As I said in an earlier thread, I am beginning to think that DC is actually psychotic, possible megalomaniacal!

Surely surely surely, every child has the right to a secure place to live? Well that is not what will happen if their (under 25 year old) parents are effectively made homeless by these cuts... I'm sure there is something in the Children's Act 1989 about that; looks like they will have to rewrite legislation then!!

People know childcare and housing costs are high.. so they have children, then bleat for the childcare and rents to be reduced. No thought that childcare providers need a living wage and home owners need to recover their outgoings.It shows a total naivety and immaturity..

yes it needs to change, cost of living is seriously out of kilter with wages... but not looking at the model as a whole is ridiculous and just chopping outgoings would have a bad impact too.

Everyone needs a living wage...not just childcare providers'!

people who have children are also in jobs...low paid jobs, sometimes on a lone income...they are not "bleating" for cheaper childcare and housing. And...if there were laws on unscrupulous rents and childcare was cheaper, then these "bleaters" would not need any help from anyone,would they? And your slightly warped idea of the shrinkage of the stae would be in sight. Until maybe one day when you may need the state, of course. I wonder if we could call that "bleating" then?

people who have children are also in jobs...low paid jobs, sometimes on a lone income...they are not "bleating" for cheaper childcare and housing. And...if there were laws on unscrupulous rents and childcare was cheaper, then these "bleaters" would not need any help from anyone,would they? And your slightly warped idea of the shrinkage of the stae would be in sight. Until maybe one day when you may need the state, of course. I wonder if we could call that "bleating" then?

Do you not think that would have a knock on effect though..

If childcare and rent was capped and made to be lower then many may become bankrupt and loose the houses they own due to being unable to afford to make up the remainder of mortgage and costs per month so then they might need help, the childminders would maybe need more help as their wages would be lower and the nurseries would most likely close due to being unable to afford to run with a profit causing a loss of jobs and more people needing help

I remember me and my ex were considered intentionally homeless when an accident at home caused an explosion that left my ex disabled and covered in severe burns.

I kicked off a bit about that though and in the end they helped us (with private rented, but that was fine...we just wanted somewhere safe and clean for my ex to recuperate). This was about 6 years ago.

mad isn't it? how you supposed to live in a burnt out shell?!
glad you got sorted, something similar happened to my friend, her dodgy electrics burnt down her private rent and she got told the council had no obligation to house her or her kids.

If childcare and rent was capped and made to be lower then many may become bankrupt and loose the houses they own due to being unable to afford to make up the remainder of mortgage and costs per month so then they might need help, the childminders would maybe need more help as their wages would be lower and the nurseries would most likely close due to being unable to afford to run with a profit causing a loss of jobs and more people needing help

Sorry Paula not trying to cause an arguement but just trying to look at it from a different angle and different view point of what the effects could be.

Sorry Paula not trying to cause an arguement but just trying to look at it from a different angle and different view point of what the effects could be.

I know here in London..and I can only speak for where I live and from a personal point of view.....some nurseries are charging £200+ per week per child. You are both on NMW with 2 toddlers...it cannot be done.

A woman I know works in a chemist full time on NMW. She was renting a bedsit type flat around the corner. The windows did not shut properly, full of damp and the mice were eating her clothes. £205 per week. I cannot believe that LLs outgoings on the rathole were £800 per month. He was raking it in.

These charges/rents are extortionate. Someone somewhere is making shedloads of money on the back of struggling working people. Surely something can be done about this.

I know here in London..and I can only speak for where I live and from a personal point of view.....some nurseries are charging £200+ per week per child. You are both on NMW with 2 toddlers...it cannot be done.

A woman I know works in a chemist full time on NMW. She was renting a bedsit type flat around the corner. The windows did not shut properly, full of damp and the mice were eating her clothes. £205 per week. I cannot believe that LLs outgoings on the rathole were £800 per month. He was raking it in.

These charges/rents are extortionate. Someone somewhere is making shedloads of money on the back of struggling working people. Surely something can be done about this.

I agree as I paid £820 a month in nursery fees for my DD so do understand how hard it is.. I said before about my mortgage being over 1k a month for just a simple £130k small house in the country.. In london house prices are crazy so can imagine the mortgage "could" not saying for definate be larger than mine and therefor the repayments could be more as not everyone can get a interest only mortgage to bring payments down and not everyone can get buy to let mortgages either so are on repayment ones which are expensive and by the looks of things will rise considerably because like all the other living costs this is also rising.

I know here in London..and I can only speak for where I live and from a personal point of view.....some nurseries are charging £200+ per week per child. You are both on NMW with 2 toddlers...it cannot be done.

A woman I know works in a chemist full time on NMW. She was renting a bedsit type flat around the corner. The windows did not shut properly, full of damp and the mice were eating her clothes. £205 per week. I cannot believe that LLs outgoings on the rathole were £800 per month. He was raking it in.

These charges/rents are extortionate. Someone somewhere is making shedloads of money on the back of struggling working people. Surely something can be done about this.

Sorry forgot to say if you where on NMW chances are you would be entitled to help with your childcare through tax credits as you would be earning a low amount as I know many people use this. There is also childcare vouchers you can use too so there is some help out there for people earning low wages to help with work. So there is help on the cost of childcare for many available.